[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 27, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1226-S1227]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                             Fix NICS Bill

  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I heard the remarks of my colleague from 
Illinois, and I, too, hope that we can get past the rhetoric and the 
talking points of the past and actually do something meaningful when it 
comes to public safety and address the terrible tragedies like the one 
that occurred at Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida just 2 weeks 
ago. But we are not going to do it by trotting out our laundry lists of 
requests and saying that it has to be all of this or nothing because 
when you say here in Washington--and particularly in Congress--``I want 
everything on my list or I want nothing,'' one thing is for sure. You 
will end up with nothing, and that simply is an unacceptable outcome, 
particularly when it comes to the public safety crisis manifested here 
most recently at Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida.
  We know that there were many, many failures; you might even call this 
a systemic failure when it comes to the children at Stoneman Douglas 
High School. First and foremost, why didn't Federal and local law 
enforcement follow up on threats and warnings? This young man, the 
shooter who took the lives of 17 people, telegraphed in very clear, 
unmistakable language what he intended to do, but the very people whom 
we trust and entrust with public safety at the Federal and State levels 
did not respond.
  We know that the alleged shooter was expelled from school for 
disciplinary reasons. We know that deputies in Broward County received 
at least 18 calls warning them over the course of several years--18 
calls. We know about the disturbing YouTube posts, where the shooter 
basically said what he intend to do and did, in fact, do later. We know 
that the FBI received many disturbing tips from citizens about the 
imminent danger posed by the shooter.
  Another question is whether mental health officials could have done 
more. We know that this young man had a long history of violent 
outbursts. We are told that in 2016 he reportedly attempted suicide by 
drinking gasoline. He had been accused of verbal slurs against racial 
and religious minorities.
  We know that Florida has a State law, as some have advocated at the 
Federal level, that permits forced hospitalization of people in mental 
health crises, but it seems that in this particular case, mental health 
workers concluded that this individual was stable at the time they 
examined him. Why and how was that determination made, and why does 
that stand in such stark contrast to the picture that we have been able 
to draw as a result of all the information that we received since this 
terrible shooting? If law enforcement, public health workers, and 
school officials were communicating and coordinating effectively, would 
they have made the same decisions in this case? Could they have made a 
difference in the outcome? Well, I think we need the answers to those 
questions.
  There are two other questions we need to answer as well. One is why 
and how did the shooter have access to firearms in the first place? 
Another is why didn't the school's armed resource officer intervene 
once the shooting began?
  All of us are angry at the fact that this shooting happened, but that 
shouldn't tempt us into easy solutions that at the end of the day 
wouldn't make any difference in the outcome and wouldn't do any good. 
That is what we tend to get here in Congress when we have hard issues 
like this--easy solution talking points that lead to no effective 
action. We can't let that happen here. As one columnist put it last 
week, we can't fall victim to ``the politics of false hope.''
  The most frequent refrain I hear in Washington after some tragedy 
like this occurs is ``We need to do something.'' Well, we need to do 
something effective, something that would change the likely outcome. We 
may not be able to protect every citizen against terrible tragedies 
like this, but there are things we can do that will make things better 
and that will be effective in changing the outcome and, I believe, in 
saving lives.
  Real solutions require us to look at why the FBI and local law 
enforcement failed to respond to multiple warnings. I asked one police 
officer about this, and he said: Well, in America we can't arrest 
somebody for precrimes. In other words, we can't arrest somebody for an 
offense that they haven't committed yet. It is perhaps a flaw that is 
exposed in our system when, unfortunately, we can't anticipate who 
might commit these terrible offenses and stop them before they commit 
the act. That is a feature of our law enforcement system, but this 
isn't just another job for law enforcement. There are a lot more people 
who could contribute to a solution here and prevent these incidents 
from happening beyond law enforcement, who are, by our very 
Constitution, structured to investigate and prosecute crimes that have 
already occurred, not to stop them in the first place.
  I think a fair question to ask is, What is the role of social media 
in preventing mass violence? When you have people basically telling us 
what they are getting ready to do and posting those on social media and 
nothing seems to happen as a consequence, it strikes me that something 
is terribly wrong there. What is the responsibility of these platforms? 
Well, we know that Congress has said, for example, that you have a 
responsibility to police your platform for things like child 
pornography. In other words, they can't be totally oblivious to the 
things that are being posted on these social media platforms. They have 
a responsibility to intervene in some cases, and maybe it ought to be 
in more cases.
  What options currently exist to reporting disturbing content online? 
I believe in the YouTube video case, it was someone who actually saw 
it, was disturbed by it, and then reported it to the FBI. It was not 
even YouTube itself that identified it. Of course, they would be in the 
best position to identify it immediately. It was some third party who 
happened to see it, was disturbed by it, and contacted the FBI. 
Tragically, it was never followed up on. How often are these popular 
platforms reporting to police or Federal authorities when people 
actually threaten to commit acts of violence? If there are holes in the 
reporting protocol, we should close them.
  That is why I think this is a systemic failure. When you look at 
mental health providers, when you look at law enforcement officials, 
when you look at the schools, when you look at the social media 
platforms, when you look at all of this together, I think it begins to 
give us some ideas about things we can do that may end up saving lives, 
and we should do them.
  Members are discussing many ideas, which always happens after a 
tragedy

[[Page S1227]]

like this, and I am open to a conversation with anyone who shares my 
desire to take effective action to prevent another one of these 
tragedies. There is one proposal that has already been introduced that 
has won bipartisan support and has brought together advocates from all 
sides. It is really a unique piece of legislation because there are not 
many times that I can think of where people who are strong Second 
Amendment advocates and people who believe there ought to be more 
controls imposed on guns can come together to find consensus, to find 
common ground, but we have on a bill called the Fix NICS Act, which I 
introduced to strengthen the background check system.
  It may take a long time to answer all the questions raised by the 
tragedy in Parkland, but one step we can take right now is to pass the 
Fix NICS bill. This bill has the unique quality of causing the junior 
Senator from Connecticut and me to cointroduce this bill. We couldn't 
be more ideologically different. He is a Democrat and I am a 
Republican, but we have come together on a bill that does enjoy broad 
bipartisan support and that, I believe, will save lives.
  This bill was introduced in the wake of the shooting last fall in the 
small community near San Antonio called Sutherland Springs, TX. As we 
will recall, a deranged gunman with a criminal record and a history of 
violence and mental illness opened fire during a Sunday morning church 
service, killing 26 people and wounding 20 more. To add to the tragedy 
that had already occurred, this murderer's criminal conviction records 
were never uploaded to the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background 
Check System. When he went to purchase firearms, he lied about his 
record, and there was nothing in the criminal background check system 
to show that he lied and thus deny him the opportunity to purchase 
weapons. This failure to enforce our background check law allowed this 
shooter to walk into a gun store, pass a background check, and 
illegally purchase a firearm.
  This bipartisan legislation would tighten the National Instant 
Background Check System. It is supported by people all across the 
political spectrum. It is even cosponsored by the Democratic leader, 
Senator Schumer, and is supported by Everytown for Gun Safety. It has 
brought together all sides in the gun debate--leaders on the Republican 
side and Democratic side alike.

  Under current law, mentally ill individuals and persons convicted of 
violent crimes are prohibited by current law from purchasing or 
possessing firearms. This is to make sure that these laws are enforced 
and that criminal history information is uploaded into the NICS Federal 
database by State and Federal authorities.
  For years, our colleagues across the aisle have said that they want 
reform that would help stem the tide of gun violence perpetrated by 
dangerous criminals. Well, this is their chance. This is our chance. It 
is our chance to show the Nation that we refuse to accept shootings in 
schools and churches as the new normal, and we can do that. We can 
start doing that by passing Fix NICS this week.
  Senator Schumer, the minority leader, said yesterday that he wants to 
wait, even though he is a cosponsor of the Fix NICS bill. He is a 
cosponsor of the bill, but he says that he wants to wait. He wants to 
wait and debate other ideas he knows are controversial and can't pass. 
Of course, that is his right as a Senator, but as I said earlier, if 
our attitude is ``I want everything on my list or nothing,'' we are 
going to end up with nothing.
  I, for one, am not willing to go home and look my constituents in the 
face and say that we had an opportunity to pass legislation, the Fix 
NICS bill, which will save lives in the future and will make sure that 
existing laws are enforced. I will not be able to go home and tell 
them, in good faith, that we have done everything we can in our power 
to help save lives. We can do that by passing bipartisan legislation 
that could pass today if it were put on the floor and voted on by a 
supermajority of the Senate.
  I implore our Democratic colleagues to change course. Let's do the 
art of the possible. That is what politics is, the art of the possible. 
Let's do what we can immediately to pass Fix NICS and build from there. 
I am willing to work with them. The President is willing to work with 
them on things like bump stocks and the mental health failure, trying 
to make sure that our schools are safer and to make sure that social 
media platforms report threats of violence to law enforcement officials 
so they can be followed up on.
  There are a lot of other things we can do, but the one thing we can 
do this week before we go home is to pass the Fix NICS bill and to send 
it to the House and have the President sign it into law. It will save 
lives.
  I yield the floor.